\ 



<$> 



s» 






BARBERRY BUSHES 
AND WHEAT 



BV 



ANDREW McFARLAND DAVIS 



BARBERRY BUSHES 
AND WHEAT 

BY 

ANDREW McFARLAND DAVIS 



REPRINTED FROM 

THE PUBLICATIONS 

OF 

€tje Colonial ^oactp of <$}tem\)ii#ttt$ 
Vol. XI 



CAMBRIDGE 
JOHN WILSON AND SON 

©mtetsits $«ss 
1907 



Gift 
Authoi 
(Person) 



*<* 






BARBERRY BUSHES AND WHEAT — A SUPPLEMENT TO A 

CHAPTER IN "THE OLD FARMER AND 

HIS ALMANACK." 

In offering for the consideration of this Society the following 
comments on the subject of Barberry Bushes and Wheat, which 
will serve perhaps as a supplement to one of the chapters in Pro- 
fessor Kittredge's recently published work, The Old Farmer and 
his Almanack, I may perhaps be pardoned if I preface them with 
a few words concerning almanacs in general, their functions and 
their evolution. If these introductory remarks shall seem to be 
unnecessary, it will be recognized, at least, that they will help us 
to appreciate the character of the work upon which Mr. Kittredge 
entered when he undertook to analyze the pages of the Farmer's 
Almanac. 

An almanac is defined by the Encyclopaedia Britannica as — 

a book or table, published from year to year, containing a calendar of 
the days, weeks and months of the year, a register of ecclesiastical fes- 
tivals and saints' days, and a record of various astronomical phenomena, 
particularly the rising and setting of the sun and moon, the times of high 
water at particular ports, etc. In addition to these contents, which may 
be regarded as essential to the almanac, it generally presents additional 
information, which is more or less extensive and varied according to the 
many different special objects contemplated in works of this kind. 

The author of the article from which the above is quoted also 
says that the almanac proper is often secondary to a variety of 
extraneous matter included in the publication, and he refers to two 
of these annuals " as works of general statistical reference ... of 
very great value." 

The Century Dictionary says : " Many annual publications called 
almanacs are largely extended by the insertion of historical, politi- 
cal, statistical and other current information as supplemental to the 
calendar." 

Many statistical works of this class have become absolutely 
essential for one who would keep up with the times. The digests 



74 THE COLONIAL SOCIETY OF MASSACHUSETTS [Jan. 

of current political events contained in the almanacs published 
annually by the leading New York papers, for example, are indis- 
pensable for the politician who deals with national affairs. In a 
similar way there are in Europe compilations known as almanacs 
having international reputations, to which a student may turn with 
confidence for inf ormation as to imports and exports, national debts, 
military and naval equipments and expenditures, and the current 
events of political importance which have occurred during the year 
next preceding their issue. One of these, having a special feature 
of its own, is described in Scribner's Monthly for January, 1907. 
" The Almanack De Grotha" says the writer, — 

is to Europe what Burke and Debrett and the other Peerages are to the 
British Isles, and it is also the lineal ancestor and model of such topical 
encyclopsedias as our "Whittaker ", our "Hazell" and our "States- 
man's Year-Book." A political and social history of the world for the 
last one hundred and fifty years could be written from its back numbers 
if these were readily accessible to students. But they are not. The 
Almanack De Gotlia began to appear in 1763, but the purchasers did not 
file it for reference. The earliest numbers in the British Museum are 
those for 1774 and 1783, and a complete set can only be found in the 
editorial offices in Friederich's Allee in the little Thuringian capital 
whence the 141st issue was lately published. 

The Nation for January 3, 1907, says, " The Almanach De Gotha 
for 1907 (its 144th year) comes to us as usual and takes its place 
among books reserved for reference." 1 

The belief in the influence of the heavenly bodies upon the con- 
dition and affairs of men, early led to the introduction in almanacs 
not only of prognostications as to the weather but also of prophe- 
cies of events. The popularity based on these appeals to the super- 

1 The almanacs printed by the Cambridge Press in the early days of the 
Colony have attracted the attention of bibliographers, and their value in the 
eyes of collectors has been greatly enhanced by their rarity. One among 
them, in which the calculations were made by a future President of Harvard 
College, is thus alluded to by Cotton Mather, in his life of Urian Oakes in 
the Magnalia: 

Being here a lad of small, as he never was of great stature, he published a little 
parcel of astronomical calculations with this apposite verse in the title page : 
Parvum parva decent, sed inest sua Gratia parvis. 

The "parcel of astronomical calculations " was the Almanac for 1G50. 



1907] BARBERRY BUSHES AND WHEAT 75 

stitions of the purchasing public soon caused these publications 
to assume the form of annuals. In England a government monopoly 
of the right " to sell almanacs and prognostications " remained in 
force for nearly one hundred and seventy-five years from the date 
of the grant. 

The original letters patent were issued under James I, October 
29, 1603. They were surrendered and renewed in the 13th year of 
the reign, 1615, the original letters being recited in the renewal. 
" Full power, privilege and authority " were given, " to print or 
cause to be printed, all manner of almanacks and prognostications 
whatever in the English tongue, and all manner of books, tending 
to the same purpose, being allowed by the Archbishop of Canter- 
bury and Bishop of London." The letters contained a " prohibition 
to all other printers &c. not to buy, sell, or utter any other than 
should be printed by the said Compan}\" The monopoly originally 
granted to two individuals came into the hands of the Stationers' 
Company and the profits were for a time shared with the Universities 
of Oxford and Cambridge. 1 It was attacked from time to time in 
the courts and was finally overthrown in 1775, in a suit against one 
Thomas Carnan. 2 There were two points raised in this case — one 
that the monopoly applied only to almanacs approved by the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London — the other that 
it was not good anyway. The decision was sweeping against the 
monopoly. How it could have prevented the publication of alma- 
nacs not approved by those clerical authorities during this period, 
may perhaps be gathered from the definition of an almanac given in 
the suit of the Company of Stationers against Seymour in 1654. 3 

1 In 1781 an annual allowance was made to each of these universities by 
the government, " in lieu of the Money heretofore paid to the said Universities 
by the Company of Stationers of the City of London, for the Privilege of print- 
ing Almanacks." The tenth section of the Act in which this was accomplished 
recites that the privilege of printing and vending almanacs had been granted 
to the universities and by them demised to the Company of Stationers, for which 
they had received one thousand pounds and upwards annually. This privilege 
had by a late decision at law been found to be "a common right, over which 
the Crown had no Controul, and consequently the Universities no Power to 
demise the same to any Person or Body of Men " (21 George III, Ch. 56). 

2 2 W. Blackstone, p. 1003 et seq. 

8 Trinity Term of the Court of Common Pleas, 29 Car. II and reported 1 
Mod. p. 250. 



76 THE COLONIAL SOCIETY OF MASSACHUSETTS [Jan. 

Seymour was sued in an action of debt, for printing Gadbury's 
Almanack without leave of the Company. The Court opens its 
decision sustaining the monopoly in the following language: 

There is no difference in any material part betwixt this almanack and 
that which is put in THE RUBRICK of the common-prayer. Now the 
almanack that is before the common-prayer proceeds from a public con- 
stitution ; it was first settled by the Nicene Council; is established by 
the canons of the church ; and is under the government of the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury ; so that almanacks may be accounted prerogative 
copies. 

The Court then goes on to say, " There is no particular author of 
an almanack," and deals with the special matter included in the 
publication as follows: "Those additions of prognostications and 
other things that are common to almanacks do not alter the case." 

Fortunately for posterity this case was overruled in 1775, and 
Mr. Carnan was permitted to publish " A Diary for the Year of our 
Lord 1774," without responsibility to the Stationers' Company for 
his profits. The dictum propounded by the Court in 1654, that 
" There is no particular author to an almanack," has also been 
set aside by authorities competent for the purpose. Allibone prac- 
tically settled this question when he enrolled the name of Robert B. 
Thomas in his Dictionary of Authors, and Oscar Fay Adams 
endorsed the decision by admitting the name among those which he 
thought worthy of record in his similar work, limited, however, to 
those who claimed to be American authors. Drake, when he gave 
the name a resting place in his Dictionary of American Biography, 
to all intents and purposes made the same decision, and from his 
work the question was passed on to the editors of Appletons' 
Cyclopaedia of American Biography, where the approval by James 
Grant Wilson and John Fiske of the insertion of Thomas's name 
secured the public endorsement of two other authorities to this 
repudiation of the doctrine propounded in the old decision. 

There is still another dictum in the Seymour case which has 
been quoted, viz. : " Those additions of prognostications and other 
things that are common to almanacks do not alter the case," i. e., to 
go back to the decision, these additions " made no difference in any 
material part betwixt" Gadbury's "almanack and that which is 
put in the Kubrick of the Common-Prayer." We may assume 



1907] BARBERRY BUSHES AND WHEAT 77 

that Gadbury's had many of the features which distinguish the 
Farmer's Almanac and hence can cite The Old Farmer and his 
Almanack as evidence that the Court was also in error in this 
statement. Thus the whole fabric of the decision is toppled over, 
and the name of Thomas, which in spite of this ancient decision had 
already secured recognition as an author when The Old Farmer 
and his Almanack appeared, has through this recent publication 
secured a fresh hold upon fame. Existing sets of the Almanac 
might be destroyed ; dictionaries and encyclopcedias might disappear, 
and still Professor Kittredge's work might be relied upon to vindi- 
cate the reputation of the Almanac and rescue the name of its 
author from oblivion. 

The title-page of the volume containing the chapter on Barberry 
Bushes and Wheat which has occasioned this paper, contained the 
following description of the contents of the book : " Observations 
on Life and Manners in New England a Hundred Years Ago, sug- 
gested by reading the earlier numbers of Mr. Robert B. Thomas's 
Farmer's Almanack Together with Extracts, Curious, Instruc- 
tive and Entertaining, as well as a Variety of Miscellaneous 
Matter." 

Notwithstanding the fact already shown that certain annual pub- 
lications under the name of almanacs have acquired reputation as 
historical authorities upon special points, it cannot be denied that 
it required some courage on the part of Professor Kittredge to 
attempt an analysis of the "new, useful and entertaining matter" 
with which Thomas was accustomed to promise his readers that 
they would be rewarded if they should peruse the pages of his 
Almanac. Nor does the fact that Thomas has — as disclosed 
aDO y e — secured recognition through this work as an author, di- 
minish to any great extent the tax upon the courage that was 
required for a careful and deliberate investigation of a publication 
like the Farmer's Almanac, which not only did not purport to be 
historical in character, but which still clung to the feature of prog- 
nostications and to sundry other of the things alluded to by the 
Court in 1654 as "common to almanacks." Prognostications of 
this sort and the absurdity of some of the material with which 
almanacs from the earliest times were garnished has, in times 
past, offered a ready theme for satirists like Rabelais and Swift, 
and indeed continues to do so to this day. Nevertheless, mixed 



78 THE COLONIAL SOCIETY OF MASSACHUSETTS [Jan. 

in with the information about the planets, one might expect to 
find, in addition to absurd medical prescriptions, notices of saints' 
days and predictions of weather and occurrences, occasional refer- 
ences to historical events. From much of this miscellaneous 
mixture of worthless stuff, the intelligence of Thomas protected 
Avhoever should analyze the pages of his Almanac, and the prom- 
ise on his title-page that it would be found to contain "as great a 
variety as are to be found in any other Almanac of NEW, USEFUL 
and ENTERTAINING MATTER " consequently had some value. 
Yet it will readily be admitted that there was still a great demand 
left upon the discretion of one who should be required to analyze a 
complete set of this work in search for historical matter. 

Facing page 81 of The Old Farmer and his Almanack there is 
a reproduction of a page from the Almanac itself where we may 
see in facsimile the entries for the month of October, 1800. Under 
the heading "Coitrts, Aspects, Holidays, Weather, frc. $c." predic- 
tions are given that on the first there will be '■''Cool Breezes ;" on 
the fifth it will " Storm ; " on the eighth, ninth, and tenth it will be 
" Pleasant for the Season ; " and so on through the month. Informa- 
tion as to tides, sun-rise, eclipses, and church festivals is varied with 
what was of equal importance to a large part of the community, 
the dates and places of assemblage of the Supreme Judicial Court 
and the Court of Common Pleas. The historical anniversaries 
alluded to are: "16th, Q. of Fr. behead 1793;" "17th, Burgoyne 
sur. 1777 ; " " 30th, Pres. Adams born 1735." Under the heading 
" Farmer's Calendar " there is a good deal of sound advice to the 
farmer as to what may be done to advantage at this season of the 
year and what also ought not to be done. 

A glance at this facsimile page will reveal the size of the task 
which was imposed upon one who would run through the great 
number of pages of this character, necessitated by the search for 
topics alluded to therein which might bear upon life and manners 
in New England a hundred years ago, even though reliance was 
placed upon prefatory matter, rather than upon the pages of the 
Calendar. It is with keen appreciation of the thorough manner in 
which this work was performed by the author of The Old Farmer 
and his Almanack, that I venture to take up the subject intro- 
duced under the title " Barberries and Wheat " on page 327, in the 
hopes that what I can add thereto may prove to be of interest. 



1907] BARBERRY BUSHES AND WHEAT 79 

Mr. Kittredge quotes from the Almanac a letter dated at Maiden, 
August 26, 1799, written by one P. Sprague, who speaks of the 
barberry bush as " the most pernicious bush that ever I knew grow 
upon the face of the earth, multiplying exceedingly fast though 
great pains are taken by many of our people to clear their lands of 
them, but to no purpose. Some cut them down, some burn them on 
where they were cut ; others attempt to pull them up with their 
oxen, but they soon sprout again four to one, and it is said by many, 
that there is no way to clean the land of them." The writer then 
goes on to prescribe the following method of getting rid of them : 

An effectual Method to Destroy Barberry Bushes. 

Let a man take a small chain with short links, and lay it on the 
ground round a bunch of bushes, then lay one of the hooks across the 
chain and draw it as snug as he can with his hands about the bush close 
to the ground, then put on a sufficient team to bring it up by the roots 
at once. If this be done in the months of October or November, it will 
never fail to exterminate them. 

Sprague's letter is introduced by the author with the preliminary 
statement that "The barberry already had a bad reputation. It 
infested the land and was a great nuisance to farmers on account 
of its tenacity of life," the italics being mine. 

Having thus transcribed to his pages Mr. Sprague's effective 
method for destroying the bushes, Professor Kittredge continues 
as follows: "Our correspondent, it will be noted, has nothing 
to say of the blasting powers of the barberry, but we have a very 
circumstantial account of them from about the same time, in Presi- 
dent Dwight's narrative of his journey to Berwick, Maine, in 
1796." Extensive quotations are then given from this narrative. 
President Dwight dwells at length upon the pest that the barberry 
bush had proved to be to farmers in Eastern Massachusetts. He 
says " neat farmers " are able to keep them down in the open fields, 
but cannot eradicate them along the division walls. He expresses 
the belief that it would be impossible to get rid of them without 
tearing down the division walls, i. e. the walls which separate the 
fields from each other as well as from the highways. " The bush," 
he says, " is, in New England, generally believed to blast both 
wheat and rye." This lie attributes to the blossoms which for 



80 THE COLONIAL SOCIETY OF MASSACHUSETTS [Jan. 

a long time emit a pungent effluvium " believed to be so acrimoni- 
ous as to injure essentially both these kinds of grain." He then 
enumerates instances of observation which justify this belief. A 
single barberry bush grew upon the southern side of a wheat field 
in Long Island. Southerly winds prevailed when it was in bloom. 
The effluvium and the dead blossoms were borne over a small breadth 
in the field to a considerable distance. Wherever this took place 
the wheat was blasted. In Worcester County, Massachusetts, he 
heard of two similar cases. In the first of these, which he describes 
at length, there also was a single barberry bush at the south end 
of the field, and there also " the grain was blasted throughout the 
whole field, in a narrow tract commencing at the bush and pro- 
ceeding directly in the course and to the extent in which the 
blossoms were diffused by the wind." The second of these cases 
was of substantially the same character. It occurred in the same 
township as the one just described and was disclosed to him by 
the same authority. 

Dr. Dwight's conclusions are given in the following words : 
" As no part of the grain was blasted in either of these cases, 
except that which lay in a narrow tract leeward of the barberry 
bushes; these facts appear to be decisive and to establish the 
correctness of the common opinion. Should the conclusion be 
admitted ; we cannot wonder, that wheat and rye should be blasted 
wherever these bushes abound." 

Having got on track of these well authenticated and specific 
instances of the evil effect of permitting barberry bushes to grow 
in proximity to fields of grain, we may be sure that they furnished 
the Doctor a topic of conversation and at last he found one person 
ready to bring the new charge against the barberry bush that it 
was an enemy to esculent roots. He did not, however, accept this 
as proven, but in winding up his indictment of the pernicious 
bush, he says, with reservation, " If there be no error in the 
account, it indicates that the barberry bush has an unfavorable 
influence on other vegetable productions beside wheat and rye." 1 

Professor Kittredge then quotes from Lieutenant John Harriot 
who speaks of the difficulty of growing wheat in 1794, on the sea- 
coast in New England, which is attributed by some to saline 

1 Dwight, Travels in New England and New York, i. 381-383. Cf. i. 376. 



1907] BARBERRY BUSIIES AND WHEAT 81 

vapors, by others to the vicinity of barberry bushes. 1 Harriot's 
own opinion was that the true causes were poor soil and bad 
management. 

The chapter on " Barberry Bushes and Wheat " which is under 
our consideration closes with the statement that " The innocent 
barberry bush gradually lost its bad eminence in the farmer's 
mind." In thus declaring innocent the culprit indicted by Presi- 
dent Dwight with such vigor and force, our author was evidently 
affected by the close proximity to the end of his chapter, in the 
arrangement of his material, of the doubts of Harriot and of 
certain other doubts of later date, to which also he refers. It is 
to the question whether the specific charges of President Dwight 
were not entitled to preference that I now address myself, and the 
authorities which I shall cite belong to the New England of a 
hundred years ago and upward as well as to the modern scientific 
world. 

Let us turn first to the statutes of the Province. We shall find, 
if we examine the legislation of the General Court in December, 
1754, that this very subject was there taken up and that a tem- 
porary Act to remain in force for nine and one-half years was then 
passed, the purpose of which was to secure the extirpation of the 
barberry bush in Massachusetts. It will also be seen that the 
difficulty alluded to by President Dwight with regard to the divi- 
sion walls was recognized at that time and provision was made for 
the destruction of the bushes where they grew in walls or fences. 
This legislation is introduced by a preamble which distinctly 
asserts that "the blasting of wheat and other English grain is 
often occasioned by barberry bushes." The tenacity of life of the 
pernicious bush, so strongly set forth in the Sprague letter, was 
evidently recognized by those who drew up this statute, but the 
sole cause for this legislation was, if we may accept the allegations 
of the preamble, because of the office of the barberry bush in 
blasting grain. Unfortunately we have no record of the journey 
through Massachusetts of any Dr. Dwight in 1750, and must 
depend exclusively on the general assertions of this preamble and 
the character of the legislation itself for our knowledge of the 
observed facts on which the statute was based. The observations 



1 Struggle through Life, London, 1807, ii. 32-33. 
6 



82 THE COLONIAL SOCIETY OF MASSACHUSETTS [Jan. 

recorded by Dr. D wight must have occurred about thirty years 
after the expiration of the temporary act referred to. It may be 
that for a time the farmers got the upper hand of the barberry 
bush. At any rate, it will be noted that all knowledge of the 
legislation or of the experience which led up to it would seem 
to have been forgotten when Dr. Dwight and his interlocutors 
exchanged views upon the character of the barberry bush. 1 

For an appreciation of the completeness with which the ground 
was covered by those who drew up this statute it is necessary 
to reproduce the Act itself in full. It may, however, be useful 
before doing so to say that the law was evidently based upon the 
belief that the people of the Province demanded its passage. The 
power, therefore, to carry out its provisions was given to the people. 
Primarily the owner or occupant of the land was required to 
remove all barberry bushes ; if he failed to do so, methods were 
prescribed through which any person might enter on the land and 
remove the bushes and collect from the owner for services in doing 
the work. The occupant of land also had his right of collection 
from the owner for work of this sort. The only penalties imposed 
by the act were fines on towns in case the surveyors of highways 
neglected to destroy the bushes in the highways of their districts. 

The following is the language of the Statute : 



Preamble. TT 7HEREAS it has been found, by experience, that the 

VV blasting of wheat and other English grain, is often 
occasioned by barberry-bushes, to the great loss and daniago 
of the inhabitants of this Province, — 

Be it therefore enacted by the Governour, Council and 
House of Representatives, 

Barberry- bushes [Sect. 1.] That whoever, whether community or private 

to be extirpated , , , . , , , , . .... 

on or before person hath any barberry-bushes standing or growing in his 
or their land within any of the towns in this province he or 
they shall cause .the same to be extirpated or destroyed on 
or before the tenth day of June, Anno Domini one thousand 
seven hundred and sixty. , 

1 This will apply equally as well to the earlier and later Connecticut legislat- 
ion ou the same subject which is quoted hereafter (pp. S9-01, do). 



1907] BARBERRY BUSHES AND WHEAT 83 



[Sect. 2.] That if there shall be any barberry bushes Jggs^"*^ 
andino- or growing, in any land within this province, after person to cut 

-- » o 8' J m thein down, pro- 

the said tenth day of June, it shall be lawful, by virtue of vided, &c. 



this act, for any person whomsoever to enter the lands 

wherein such barberry-bushes are (first giving three months' 

notice of his intention so to do, to the owner or occupant 

thereof) and to cut them down, or pull them up by the roots, 

and then to present a fair account of his labour and charge 

therein to the owner or occupant of the said land ; and if 

such owner or occupant shall neglect or refuse by the space Provisioning 

of two months next after the presenting of said account, pants neglect, 

to make to such person reasonable payment as aforesaid, 

then the person who cut down or pulled up such bushes, 

may bring his action against such owner or occupant, owners 

or occupants, before any justice of the peace, if under forty 

shillings ; or otherwise, before the inferiour court of common 

pleas, in the county where such bushes grew; who, upon 

proof of the cutting down or pulling up of such bushes, by 

the person who brings the action, or such as were employed 

by him, shall and is hereby, respectively, empowered to 

enter up judgment for him to recover double the value of 

the reasonable expence and labour in such service and 

award execution accordingly. 

Be it further enacted, 

[Sec. 3.] That if the lands on which such bushes grow ££™™y* 
are common and undivided lands, that then an action may ca^sof the like 
be brought, as aforesaid, against any one of the proprietors, 
in such manner as the laws of this province provide in such 
cases where proprietors may be sued. 

Be it further enacted, 

[Sec. 4.] That the surveyors of the highways, whether g«™jg»£ 
publick or private, be and hereby are empowered and re- gJ-J**^ 
quired, ex officio, to destroy and extirpate all such barberry bushes standing 
bushes as are or shall be in the highways in their respective m 
wards or districts ; and if any such shall remain after the 
aforesaid tenth day of June, Anno Domini one thousand 
seven hundred and sixty, that then the town or district 
in which such bushes are, shall pay a fine of two shillings Penalty, in case. 



84 THE COLONIAL SOCIETY OF MASSACHUSETTS [Jan. 

for every bush standing or growing on such highway, 'to be 
recovered by bill, plaint, information, or the presentment 
of a grand jury, and to be paid, one half to the informer 
and the other half to the treasurer of the county in which 
such bushes grew, for the use of the county. 

Be it further enacted, 

Provision if such [Sec. 5.] That if any barberry bushes stand or grow in 
stonewST, OT in any stone wall, or other fence, either fronting the highway, 
fence " or dividing between one proprietor and another, that then 

an action may be brought, as aforesaid, against the owner 
of said fence, or the person occupying the land to which 
such land belongs ; and if the fence in which such bushes 
grow is a divisional fence between the lands of one person 
or community and another, and such fence hath not been 
divided, by which means the particular share of each person 
or community is not known, then action may be brought, as 
aforesaid, against either of the owners or occupants of said 
land. 

Be it further enacted, 

owner or pro- [Sect. 6.] That where the occupant of any land shall 
puinn^p P or de- eradicate and destroy any barberry bushes growing therein, 
bushes* Baid or m an y °f * ae f eaces belonging to the same (which such 
occupant is hereby authorized to do, and every action to be 
brought against him for so doing shall be already barred) 
or shall be obliged, pursuant to this act, to pay for pulling 
them up or cutting them down, that then the owner or pro- 
prietor of such land shall pay the said occupant the full 
value of his labour and cost in destroying them himself, or 
what he is obliged to pay to others as aforesaid ; and if the 
said owner or owners shall refuse so to do, then it shall 
be lawful for said occupant or occupants to withhold so 
much of the rents or income of said land as shall be suffi- 
cient to pay or reimburse his cost or charge arising as 
aforesaid. 
Limitation. [Sect. 7.] This act to continue and be in force until the 

tenth day of June one thousand seven hundred and sixty- 
four. [Passed December 26, 1754; published, January 13, 
1755.] x 



1 Massachusetts Province Laws, 1754-55, Ch. 20, iii. 797, 798. 



1907] BARBERRY BUSHES AND WHEAT 85 

It will be seen that five years and a half were given within which 
owners of land were to extirpate all the barberry bushes in the 
Province, and that provision was made for procuring the work to be 
done in the case of common or undivided hinds, as well as in 
cases of doubtful responsibility such as that of bushes growing 
in division walls. To secure the accomplishment of this work, 
reliance was placed upon the authority given to the general public 
to perform it in case of neglect by the owner. The Act 
was of a temporary nature. It expired by limitation in 17G4. 
Much of the legislation of that day was temporary, and if 
there seemed to be occasion for renewal, the operation of such 
statutes was from time to time extended. This particular statute 
was not extended. Whether we may infer from this its success or 
its failure, is a matter purely for conjecture. In view, however, of 
the fact that modern botanists have established beyond doubt a 
connection between the barberry bush and the rust which infects 
wheat, it would seem probable that this wholesale attack upon the 
barberry bushes of Massachusetts probably had such a beneficial 
effect that when the time of the expiration of the Act came round 
it was not thought necessary to stimulate farmers by public legisla- 
tion to protect their wheat fields in the future. 

This subject cannot properly be closed without mention being 
made of what the function of the barberry bush is in propagating 
rust on growing wheat. In order to do this we must necessarily 
trespass upon a field of scientific research foreign to the objects of 
this Society, but fortunately for our special purpose we have at our 
command material which will in the main be intelligible, even if 
we are not ourselves sufficiently skilled to comprehend technical 
details. 

First, let us quote from a note to this chapter in the Province 
Laws, written by our associate Mr. Abner C. Goodell. He says: 

It will be seen in the following communication to Silliraan's Journal, 
by the distinguished botanist, Dr. Asa Gray of Cambridge, that the 
sagacity of the promoters of this measure is fully vindicated by the 
later researches of European cryptogamists : 

The effect of barberry-bushes in rusting wheat, after having been long 
accounted a groundless popular superstition, is at length understood and ad- 
mitted by the cryptogamists. The botanists used to rebut the farmers by the 
statemeut that the rust in the grain-fields and the prevalent fungus of the 



86 THE COLONIAL SOCIETY OF MASSACHUSETTS [Jan. 

barberry belonged to very different genera, and that therefore the one could not 
give origin to the other. But De Bary in Germany and (Eersted in Denmark, 
following up similar inquiries by Tulasne in France, have concluded that 
Uredo, Puccinia and jEcidium are to be regarded, not as so many genera, but as 
three successive forms of fructification of the same fungus, or, in some sort, an 
alternation of generations. De Bary ascertained that the spores of Puccinia 
graminis do not germinate when sprinkled on the leaves and stalks of the cereal 
grains, which this rust infests, while they will germinate on the leaves of the 
barberry, and there give rise to the JEcidium berberidis ; and the spores of this 
are equally inert upon the barberry, but will grow, in their turn, upon wheat, 
and then reproduce first the Uredo, or yellow rust, and later the Puccinia gram- 
inis or dark rust. Another species of Puccinia equally produces JEcidium upon 
buckthorn ; another alternates between the cereal grains and certain boragineous 
weeds. These results have been practically tested, in the large way, last sum- 
mer (1869) in France. Long hedges of barberry planted along the Paris and 
Lyons railway in a commune in the Cote d'Or, were complained of by the adja- 
cent cultivators and were cut away at certain places by way of experiment; and 
an investigation by the railroad company, whose interests were adverse to such 
a decision, left no doubt of the injurious effects of the barberry on the contigu- 
ous wheat fields. — American Journal of Science and the Arts, vol. 49, 1870, p. 406 
(No. CXLVIL, 2d series). 

The French account referred to is in "Bulletin de la Societe Botanique 
de France," torn. 16, pp. 331-333. 1 

The foregoing may perhaps be considered adequate to establish 
the fact that our ancestors were on the right track ; that it was not 
the mere " tenacity of life " of the barberry bush which disturbed 
them, but that its presence was an actual menace to the wheat. If, 
however, we require more evidence we may turn to that encyclo- 
pedic dictionary, The Century, where we shall find the following 
definition for Puccinia, which may be considered as fully corrobor- 
ating the charge of complicity on the part of the barberry bush in 
propagating rust. 

Puccinia — A genus of parasitic fungi of the class Uredinem; the 
rusts. Plants of this genus exhibit the phenomenon of heteroecism, 
that is, they pass through different stages of their life-history upon 
different host plants. P. graminis, one of the commonest and most 
destructive species, may be taken as a type. It appears in the spring on 
the leaves of the Berberis vulgaris, constituting what is known as bar- 
berry rust, or barberry cluster cups. This is the aecidial stage, and 

1 Massachusetts Province Laws, iii. 835. 



1907] BARBERRY BUSHES AND WHEAT 87 

received the name of JEcidium Berberidis before the heteroecism was 
suspected. Later in the season the uredo stage makes its appearance 
on the leaves and stems of the cultivated oats, wheat, etc., appearing as 
pale yellowish or whitish spots on the leaves. Soon the tissues are rup- 
tured and the long lines of orange red, uredo spores are exposed, now 
constituting the red rust of oats, etc. By the rapid germination of the 
uredo spores the disease is quickly spread, and may involve the entire 
plant. In the fall, just before cold weather, the black teleuto-spores 
are produced. This is known as the black rust, and is designed to carry 
the fungus over the winter, when it again begins its life-cycle on the 
barberry. About 450 species of Puccinia are known, not a few of 
which are serious pests to the agriculturist or horticulturist. 

Our somewhat desultory discussion has taken us into the domain 
of almanacs ; we have quoted largely from English law reports 
and from a book written about a set of almanacs ; we have invaded 
the field of Provincial legislation ; and finally we have been stranded 
upon that abstruse modern science, cryptogamic botany. 

The discussion of purely botanical questions is foreign to the 
purposes M of this Society, yet I cannot refrain from communicating 
the substance of a letter to me from Professor Charles E. Bessey of 
the University of Nebraska. After speaking of the rust and its 
methods of propagation, Professor Bessey says : 

It was noticed, however, long ago, that there was wheat rust in 
abundance where there were no barberry bushes, and in some places 
there were barberry bushes that were not affected with rust to any great 
extent. The explanation of this is that for some reason or other, the 
rust is not wholly dependent upon its barberry phase of existence. On 
the plains and prairies of the west there are no barberry bushes except- 
ing a few that are planted in the gardens and on the grounds around 
houses, and yet this species of rust, Puccinia graminis is very abundant. 
Some years ago it was found that the phase of rust which occurs on the 
wheat plant is able to live through the winter. Infection may take place 
in the late autumn, and the rust persists through the winter, so that 
there is no need of infection of the wheat in the spring of the year 
from the barberry bushes. I should say that the autumn infection of 
the wheat is from the preceding wheat crop. 

We have here, apparently, an interesting case of a change of habitat 
of a parasite, whereas it formerly (and normally) lived first on the bar- 
berry, where it gained sufficient strength to form large spores able to 



88 THE COLONIAL SOCIETY OF MASSACHUSETTS [Jan. 

penetrate the wheat, and then on the wheat to develop its second -stage. 
Now, apparently, under favorable conditions offered by the wide cultiva- 
tion of winter wheat, this rust parasite is able to pass from wheat crop 
to wheat crop directly. 

Thus we have the testimony of a recognized authority on such 
subjects whose residence in Nebraska has permitted personal obser- 
vation. This evidence is of such a nature that we can no longer 
deny the possibility of an " innocent " barberry bush. Yet this 
does not release the pernicious bush from the condemnation which 
it received at the hands of President Dwight, nor ought it to lessen 
our admiration for the observations of our ancestors made in New 
England under circumstances when the widespread cultivation of 
winter wheat did not present the favorable conditions for the prop- 
agation of rust upon the wheat plant itself which now exist upon 
the plains and prairies of the West. On the contrary, we must 
admit the sagacity which could connect cause and effect under con- 
ditions which, according to Dr. Gray, led scientific men to account 
this " a groundless superstition " which they sought to rebut by 
declaring the rust on the wheat to be incapable of origin from the 
fungus on the barberry bush. The farmers proved to be right and 
the botanists of that day wrong. 

Two things are impressed upon us as a result of this review of an 
interesting but comparatively unimportant matter. The first of 
these, the unerring sagacity with which observers traced out the 
source of the contamination of the wheat fields, has already been 
dwelt upon. The state of botanical science at that time did not 
permit that the mysterious method of propagation should be then 
revealed, but it will be admitted that a compulsory application 
of the legislation which sought to cure the evil by removing the 
source of propagation could only have produced beneficial results. 
Apparently, in after days doubts were thrown by scientific men 
upon the justice of the recorded observations, and then, under the 
influence of these doubts, came forgetfulness of the lesson which 
had been so thoroughly learned. In a similar way the experiences 
through which the same people passed, during the period when they 
were dependent upon bills of public credit for a medium of trade, 
furnished a complete object lesson as to the evils of a redundant 
irredeemable paper currency, a lesson which was freely accepted by 



1907] BARBERRY BUSHES AND WHEAT 89 

the best intellects of the Province. Yet this too was neglected by 
their posterity when the printing-press proved a more convenient 
method than borrowing for covering an emergent need. Whatever 
may be the feelings of the student of our Provincial history at 
finding this tendency to forget well certified experiences, he will at 
least be grateful for their evidences of intelligent observation and 
receptive mentality on the part of our forefathers. 

The foregoing, relative to barberry bushes and wheat, has not 
touched upon the legislation in the other New England Colonies 
on the same subject. To fill out this gap in the discussion I add 
hereto certain references to the Colonial Records of Connecticut 
and Rhode Island, which have been furnished me by Mr. Albert 
Matthews, and it seems to me that the statutes referred to are 
entitled to be given in full. The oldest legislation upon the sub- 
ject took place in Connecticut in May, 1726, when the following 
act was passed : 

An Act concerning Barberry Bushes. 

,/ Whereas the abounding of barberry bushes is thought to be very hurt- 
ful, it being by plentiful experience fouud that, where they are in large 
quantities, they do occasion, or at least increase, the blast on all sorts 
of English grain, 

Be it therefore enacted by the Governour, Council and Representa- 
tives, in General Court Assembled, and by the authority of the same, 
That the inhabitants of the several towns within this Colony, may and 
they are hereby fully impowered at their annual town meetings,, to deter- 
mine and agree upon the utter destroying of the said bushes within their 
respective townships, and the time and manner how., And if any of 
the inhabitants of such town or towns so agreeing shall oppose the 
cutting down said bushes within their fields and enclosures, and forbid 
the other inhabitants coming thereinto for that end, they shall incur the 
penalty of twenty shillings," to be paid into the treasury of the town 
wherein they dwell. And if any such person shall thenceforward con- 
tinue to oppose the cutting said bushes as aforesaid, they shall also 
incur the penalty of ten shillings per month until they shall declare to 
the Selectmen their free consent for their entering into such enclosures 
and destroying the said bushes therein growing. Said penalties to be 
recovered by distraint on the goods and chattels of the person or 
persons so offending. 



90 THE COLONIAL SOCIETY OF MASSACHUSETTS [Jan. 

Provided nevertheless, That if any person or persons have -any of 
said bushes, the which they make use of or depend upon for a fence, 
such person or persons shall not incur either of the aforesaid penalties 
till after just satisfaction to them made by the town, as they and the 
selectmen can agree ; or as by two or three indifferent men, chosen by 
said parties or appointed by the civil authority, shall judge reasonable. 1 

It will be seen that the Massachusetts statute was anticipated 
in Connecticut by upwards of a quarter of a century. The method 
of procedure in Connecticut was peculiar, the whole matter being 
referred to the several towns, thus making it almost certain that 
there would be no concert of action throughout the Colony. 
Moreover, the hands of the opponents of the bill are to be seen in 
the proviso, which threw upon the towns the necessity of first 
settling with farmers who might claim that the offending bushes 
were made use of or depended upon as fences, before they could 
enforce any of the penalties of the Act. 

The caution with which the preamble of the Act is drawn is 
worthy of notice. The presence of barberry bushes in great quan- 
tity was " thought " to be very hurtful ; plentiful experience hav- 
ing shown that large quantities of the bushes occasion " or at 
least increase " the blast of all sorts on English grain. Of course 
those who drew up this preamble were ignorant that the fungus 
required a host-plant and that the different varieties of secidium 
could propagate upon different plants, but they had discovered the 
essential fact that the barberry bush " at least increased " the blast 
on grain. Its extirpation might not entirely remove the rust from 
the wheat, but they felt sure it would reduce it. 
fThe power thus lodged in the towns remained there unaltered 
for fifty-three years. There is no indication that the subject was 
under discussion in Connecticut during these years, but the fact 
that there was during this period legislation against barberry 
bushes in Massachusetts and in Rhode Island suggests the possi- 
bility that the action of these Colonies may have been brought 
to the notice of the government. At any rate in January, 1779, 
a new Act was passed, authorizing in a general way the destruc- 
tion of barberry bushes, at certain times of the year, but still leav- 
ing the enforcement of the Act to the discretion of town-officers. 
This Act follows, j 

1 Colonial Records of Connecticut, vii. 10. 



1907] BARBERRY BUSHES AND WHEAT 91 

An Act in Addition to and Alteration of the Law of this State 
entituled An Act concerning Barberry Bushes. 

Be it enacted by the Governour, Council and Representatives, in 
General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, That any 
person or persons whatsoever, with the advice and consent of the civil 
authority and selectmen, or the major part of them, of the town where 
any barberry bushes are or shall be growing, may in the months of 
March, April, October or November, enter into and upon any lands 
whereon shall be growing any barberry bushes and dig up and destroy 
such bushes without being liable to any action, suit or demand therefor ; 
any law, usage or custom to the contrary notwithstanding. 1 

(The first legislation in Rhode Island was not until ten years 
after that in Massachusetts and is to be found in the Records of the 
Colony for the year 1766. The Act, which applies only to the 
town of Middletown, was passed in August of that year. It reads 
as follows : 

An Act for destroying barberry bushes in Middletown. 

Whereas experience showeth, that barberry bushes have a very great 
tendency to blast English grain, 

Be it therefore enacted by this General Assembly, and by the au- 
thority of the same it is enacted, That where any person in the town 
of Middletown, hath any barberry bushes growing in his or her field, or 
enclosure, and shall be applied to by any free holders in said town, 
to destroy them, and the person so applied to, shall refuse or neglect 
for the space of one month, to to [sic] cut up and destroy them, that then, 
and in such case, it shall, and may be, lawful for the person so apply- 
ing, to make application to one of his Majesty's justices of the peace, 
who is hereby empowered to grant forth his warrant to impress labour- 
ers to cut and destroy all the barberry bushes there growing (for the 
destroying of which, applications hath been mde [sic] as aforesaid,) 
at the cost and charge of the complainant or complainants and not 
at the expense of the owner of the land, committing as little waste, 
and doing as little damage to the owner of the land, as the case will 

admit of. 

God save the King. 2 

If the title of this Act had been changed to " An Act to protect 
barberry-bushes in Middletown," it would have defined its appar- 

1 State Records of Connecticut, ii. 176. 

2 Rhode Island Colonial Records, vi. 509. 



92 THE COLONIAL SOCIETY OF MASSACHUSETTS [Jan. 

ent purpose about as well. The method of procedure laid down for 
the freeholder of the town who wished to compel his neighbor 
to eradicate the barberry bushes in his fields was so complicated, 
elaborate and expensive, and so many dangers lurked under the 
phrase, " doing as little damage to the owner of the land as the 
case will admit of," that it practically insured the peaceful life 
of barberry bushes in Middletown. 

/^In the seventh volume of the Records of Rhode Island, an Act 
for the destruction of barberry bushes throughout the Colony is 
referred to. 1 Although the text of this Act is not given in the 
published Records, it is to be found in the Session Laws for the 
year 1772. ) 

The following is the language of the Act : 



Act for destroy- AN ACT for destroying Barberrv-Bushes throughout 

ing Barberry J . & „ J b 

Bushes. this Colony. 

Preamble. WHEREAS it is found by Experience that Barberry- 
Hushes are very destructive to English Grain : 

Persons neglect- TT}E it therefore Enacted by this General Assembly, and, 

ing to cut or de- m~~\ 



stroy their Bar- JLM by the Authority thereof, It is Enacted, That if any 
befined" 8 ° Freeholder in this Colony shall apply to any Person having 
Barberry Bushes growing in his Field or Inclosure to destroy 
them, and the Owner of the Land shall neglect or refuse to 
cut them annually, or otherwise destroy them, he shall pay 
as a Fine, the Sum of Ten Pounds Lawful Money, One Half 
to and for the Use of the Town in which the Barberry 
Bushes grow, and the other Half to the Informer, to be 
recovered by Information before the Court of General- 
Sessions of the Peace, where the Land lies. 
Barberry-Bushes AND be it further Enacted by the Authority aforesaid, 
High ways" 8 ) be That if any Barberry-Bushes shall be found in the Commons 
To S wn° ye y e or Highways in any Town in the Colony, and any Free- 
holder of any Town therein, shall make Application to the 
Town-Treasurer of such Town to destroy them ; and such 
Town-Treasurer shall refuse or neglect so to do, for the 
Space of One Year, That then, and in such Case, such Free- 

1 Rhode Island Colonial Records, vii. 54. 



1907] BARBERRY BUSHES AND WHEAT 93 

holder may make Application, to any One of His Majesty's 
Justices of the Peace for said Town, who is hereby em- 
powered and required to grant his Warrant to procure 
Labourers to cut up and destroy the said Barberry-Bushes ; 
the Expence whereof shall be paid out of the Town-Treasury 
of such Town. 1 

This is a decided improvement upon the earlier Rhode Island 
statute, if its purpose was, as its title indicates, to secure the destruc- 
tion of barberry bushes, and its presence upon the statute books 
of the Colony doubtless furnished a weapon for those who were 
disposed to make war upon this mischief-making bush. 

A glance at the chronology of this legislation is instructive as 
well as interesting. The Colony of Connecticut began the war 
against the barberry bush in 1726. The subject was taken up in 
the Province of Massachusetts Bay in 1756. Ten years later, 
Rhode Island was awakened to the situation and joined, in a 
half-hearted way, in the fight. After an interval of six years this 
last Colony, in 1772, took the subject up again and this time passed 
an Act which, if not all that the enemies of the barberry bush 
might wish, was at any rate much more pronounced in its efforts 
to secure the destruction of the bush than the earlier statute. 
Then comes the second attack of Connecticut, now a State, in 
1779. This statute was perhaps capable of being made more effec- 
tive than the law of 1726, but was still hampered by the deference 
to the town officers which was the characteristic feature of the first 
legislation on the subject, and which is perhaps to be explained by 
the system of representation which has prevailed there from the 
days of the Charter to the present time. That the subject should 
have attracted so much attention in New England as is indicated 
by the foregoing review of the legislation, and then should have 
been so completely forgotten that modern cryptogamists were 
obliged to start at the bottom in their scientific study of this 
fungus, is very remarkable. 

A quotation has already been made from Dr. Gray, giving the 
results of modern scientific study of the fungus which makes its 
home upon the barberry bush. A few words may, perhaps, be 
appropriately added as to the knowledge and the possibility of 

1 Rhode Island Laws, August, 1772, p. 46. 






94 THE COLONIAL SOCIETY OF MASSACHUSETTS [Jan. 

knowledge of this legislation on the part of European and Ameri- 
can botanists. I am indebted to Dr. William G. Farlow, of the 
Department of Cryptogamic Botany in Harvard University, for the 
following references which, as far as they go, cover this ground. 
He tells me that as long ago as 1788, a German traveller in the 
Middle and Southern States published an account of his experi- 
ences and observations, in which he referred to this legislation. 
The author was obviously a disbeliever in the charges against the 
barberry bush, but he gives a brief account of the law derived from 
hearsay during his travels in the section of the country indicated 
above, and not from actual inspection of the printed statute. 1 It 
is not certain to which of the laws he referred, but it is interesting 
to discover that this legislation was the subject of discussion at 
this time, so far from the locality where the pest provoked these 
laws. 2 

The Massachusetts statute was referred to in various botanical 
journals towards the close of the last century, 3 and in 1882 Pro- 
fessor Farlow forwarded to Charles B. Plowright of King's Lynn, 
England, the full text of the law. This was published by him 
as a supplement to a communication to the Lynn News of Decem- 
ber 23, 1882, and was reprinted on a separate sheet under the 
heading " Wheat Mildew." 

The cultivation of wheat in this country has persistently moved 
away from the coast as our population has increased with such 
regularity, that after a little study of the statistics of emigration, 
one who knew the population of the country at a given date could 
easily predict where the contemporaneous wheat fields would bo 
found. The question of the protection of wheat from fungi is no 
longer of interest in New England, but perhaps the same spirit of 
observation which inspired the legislation which we have been dis- 
cussing, applied to the great wheat fields in the Middle West may 
be helpful to our farmers to-day. 

1 Johann David Schopf, Reise durch einige der mittlern und siidlichen 
vereinigten nordamerikanischen Staaten nach Ost-Florida und den Bahania- 
Iuseln unternommen in den Jahren 1783 und 1784. Erlangen, 17S8. 

2 The possibility that Arthur Young may have seen this naturally suggests 
itself. In that event the presumption that it was instrumental in leading up to 
the series of observations chronicled by Young and quoted by Mr. Kittredge 
(p. 96, below) makes this reference doubly interesting. 

8 See Botanical Gazette, May, 188-1, ix. 83. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



002 815 961 4 




